Wayne Rooney's Salary
- Thread starter shamans
- Start date
The second sentence has nothing to do with the first.
A) The fact that Griezmann wouldn't be paid 300K (a daft salary to pay either Rooney or Griezmann) doesn't mean there's no disparity in Rooney's case. It's not like all players with a legacy at the club should be paid 300K and all "outsiders" should be paid a low salary anyway. If we "imported" Messi, a player with no United legacy, he'd be paid more than Rooney.
B) Of course there is a disparity. Compare his on-field performances and his pay. He's one of the highest paid footballers on the planet and he isn't even on of the highest performing players in our team.
I agree with you mate, I found your chimp funny and true.
I find this poster boy justify salary thing a bit sad to be honest. Yeah poster boys earn the club money and they should be compensated for it. Having said that this relationship will continue as long as the person is successful and popular. When Sharapova got into trouble most of her sponsors abandoned her. The reason is that no one wants to be associated with someone who had failed. Same with Beckham. I doubt that he still making the same amount of money in terms of sponsors as he used to do in his glory days, which is only fair since he's a spent force. Returning to United do you think that its doing any good to the club to use a spent force as their poster boy? Someone who many critics consider not to be good enough to lead England's forward line any more? From a marketing point of view it doesn't make sense.
Its also have a negative effect on the team's morale. Think about it. Imagine yourself into a situation were your colleague is doing your same job, with half your productivity and despite all that he earning 5 times more then you. How would you feel? It also gives the impression that we're a sort of club where players can underperform on a regular basis and still get away with it. I mean if the club can stick to a 300k a week player whose consistently letting the club down then surely they can do the same with others who are paid less and had probably never handled their resignation letter.
Its time for United to decide. Are we a big club or not? If yes, then we should have high standards that need to be met on a year in year out basis. If not, then we deserve Rooney as much as we deserve the 5th place and an early exit from the CL.
Its also have a negative effect on the team's morale. Think about it. Imagine yourself into a situation were your colleague is doing your same job, with half your productivity and despite all that he earning 5 times more then you. How would you feel? It also gives the impression that we're a sort of club where players can underperform on a regular basis and still get away with it. I mean if the club can stick to a 300k a week player whose consistently letting the club down then surely they can do the same with others who are paid less and had probably never handled their resignation letter.
Its time for United to decide. Are we a big club or not? If yes, then we should have high standards that need to be met on a year in year out basis. If not, then we deserve Rooney as much as we deserve the 5th place and an early exit from the CL.
Off course it bloody matters, nobody will bat an eyelid if the likes of Will Keane aint banging it week in week out. Give Will Keane 300k/week he'll have to fart goals not to be scrutinized.
Because it has nothing to do with Griezmann.
There is no disparity. You're inventing a fictitious fan-perceived disparity to do with the common values of importation and exportation of players to other countries and other clubs leagues and applying them to Rooney's situation. Rooney signed an entry level contract and negotiated two more over long service and has built a legacy that matches a high paying salary in his country of birth playing for one of the biggest clubs in that league.
It would be the same for any other high profile English player who rises through the ranks of any club to start with a small contract and negotiate and be paid in accordance with the negotiations handled each time.
There is no disparity, he's Englands top goal scorer (English profile) and he'll very soon limp over the line to be United's top goal scorer (club profile).
I've said it before in one of the other threads. The crossroads will come when he reaches the end of this current deal. I can't see the club offering to maintain the same wage (if that article is to be believed, not the 300k a week being thrown around on the caf) but I can see him negotiating a rolling deal to stay at the club. But the landscape will be completely different by 2018/19.
I get people think he isn't worth what he's being paid now because of his performances, that is fine. But it is up to the club to see that and given his legacy and the credit in the bank with marketing I don't think they are going to jettison him until they are entirely ready.
This would sort of all make sense if United were in a situation where they were close to their salary budget limits. This is not the case at all. We have the lowest salary to turnover ratio in the league. Having offloaded RVP, Nani and Falcao, our salaries are even less than they were last season against an even higher turnover... probably about £100m higher than it was last season. Rooney's salary may be too high, but it is in no way preventing us from strengthening our squad.
The chimp bit. Chimps are highly intelligent and I fear you're selling them a bit short here! Of course people would notice!
Imagine the wine advert with a chimp instead of rooney
It didn't have anything to do with Rooney either. Rooney not being someone else doesn't mean there isn't a disparity.
Wrong. The disparity exists between his current pay and current performance levels. This is neither "fictitious" nor "fan-perceived". If you're telling me he's been playing like a 300K per week player then you're off your rockers.
The entire post is telling me about how his contract has been re-negotiated as he has piled on achievements and years in English football. We all know this and it doesn't merit a discussion.
The main question is this. Should a spent force be paid 300k a week and represent Manchester United as their poster boy? Yes or no. I think the answer is no. Just give the extra dosh to DDG and use him as our poster boy from now on.
The thought of Wayne Rooney in a wine advert nearly made me snort coffee out of my nose onto my keyboard.
Anyone claiming Rooney deserves his salary is off his rocker
How much we over pay for him is debatable, but we definitely overpay him even if you including his loyalty (which he has none), brand image, etc
How much we over pay for him is debatable, but we definitely overpay him even if you including his loyalty (which he has none), brand image, etc
Whether we can get rid of Rooney or not?
So basically, give De Gea a massive payrise and that solves our problems?
We cant just stop paying Rooney, he has a contract. That's the whole problem. We have to find someone to take him off our hands - and convince him to go. Or wait until his contract expires. We can talk about this cockup all day long but its happened now, we cant just say it was a mistake and stop paying him.
From a marketing point of view it doesn't make sense to use a spent force as our main poster boy. Actually it makes the club (who is struggling) look sad. We are better off using a younger, fresher and a real world class player as our poster boy while putting Rooney at the back (preferably between Fellaini and Romero). It may also convince DDG to remain with us a while longer instead of joining lets say the CL finalists.
Contracts cant be broken but there is many ways how to persuade a player that his time at the club is up.
We're a football club, we pay footballers a salary for being good at football. That's all there is to it and he's not 300k good.
Rooney does not bring a profitable brand, we supply him with one by association. Now I think it's fair that the top players receive a decent slice of what the club earn from image rights but the deal there is that they earn that right by being good on the pitch.
Rooney does not bring a profitable brand, we supply him with one by association. Now I think it's fair that the top players receive a decent slice of what the club earn from image rights but the deal there is that they earn that right by being good on the pitch.
Wayne Rooney is paid in line with the best players in the world. People like Messi and Ronaldo. He isn't one of these players. Surely you can see there's a problem right there?
What Rooney has done, quite admirably, is lower the expectations to such a degree in that a vaguely good half against the worst teams in the Premier League merit huge support and praise.
Rooney is living the dream and mugging the club off in the process. The return on our current investment is, frankly, pathetic.
What Rooney has done, quite admirably, is lower the expectations to such a degree in that a vaguely good half against the worst teams in the Premier League merit huge support and praise.
Rooney is living the dream and mugging the club off in the process. The return on our current investment is, frankly, pathetic.
The first step would be to tell him that he is not a guaranteed starter anymore. This "status" bullshit needs to stop. I have no issue with Rooney playing great and hence continuing to play. I do have an issue when he's the worst of the 22 players out there the manager keeps saying "the captain shwall always play".
I agree we should be pushing different players forward to be the face of the club. I think that is already happening to some extent to be honest.
I made this point a few months ago and said Martial had the kind of image the club should be associating itself with, someone came back and said that wouldnt work because Asians dont like black people!
Got there in the end.
The point isn't specifically about not being able to bring a player in because of Rooney. It's about there only being a fixed amount of money and if any player is being paid several times their contribution it has a negative effect on either squad quality, squad morale, or in most circumstances: both.
If we're aspiring to be of similar strength to Barcelona, Bayern Munich or Real Madrid with our similar resources, then we have to use our resources at least as well. That means paying a Ronaldo-like salary for a Ronaldo-like contribution, rather than this salary for a mediocre contribution.
It also has a knock of effect to other player's who then expect to be paid much more. This is the reason that Spurs are only reportedly offering Kane "only" £100k a week. They could stretch to £150-175k as a one off, but they realise that the likes of Alli, Lloris & Erikson will all be wanting something similar when it's time for their renewals, and whilst they can afford one increase of £5-6m per season, they can't afford 4-5 increases of this. It's the same as any company, seeing a co-worker get paid more for doing less not only causes resentment, but gives leverage.
With his last contract, he took a *cut* to his basic wage, which was then topped up by giving him a share of income from sponsorship deals that his own popularity helps generate:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...rt-agreement-with-Wayne-Rooneys-new-deal.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...rt-agreement-with-Wayne-Rooneys-new-deal.html
How is he so shit while getting 300K/week?
So we either have a floating salary or yearly contracts for all the players?
Because the club is run by people like the original poster who don't think that a person's salary should be based on merit.
There's nobody in either Bayern Munich or Atletico Madrid's squad that earns as much as Rooney does, Kane is going to get his wage doubled to £100,000 supposedly and Vardy's new contract was worth £80,000. Alexis Sanchez and Ozil combined earn less than Rooney does.
I genuinely don't understand how a fan of the club cannot be outraged at how much he gets paid and his lack or professionalism in earning it.
Last edited:
If a player do not deliver the goods then maybe we should place him on the transfer market?
As I said, it would only have a negative impact on squad quality if we were operating near our maximum salary budget and were prevented from strengthening due to wage restrictions. This is quite obviously not the case at the moment and not likely to be the case in the near future given how low our salary to turnover ratio is.
Squad morale? That's not really based on any evidence. Do you actually think Rooney's fellow team members are suffering low morale due to his salary? I doubt they give it a second thought to be honest... I don't think they post on the Caf.
Whooosh. Sorry probably was a bad attempt anyway.
^ Cracks me up without fail
I meant the AD not @MoonredIt's ok, my sides split long ago by the sheer amount of sarcastic "jokes" on this forum so I'm no longer able to identify sarcasm.
Unbelievable ad. Makes me feel like drinking too much wine might turn me into an idiot.
You use people for marketing based on their recognition all over the world. A lot of people who don't watch football know Rooney. Barely anyone knows Smalling outside of England and united fans.
If that's the case then we might employ Mickey Mouse and use him as our poster boy. Surely he's more marketable then Rooney.
That's the problem with this club. They think that the vast majority of their fans are stupid
Whether you like it or not Rooney is marketable. It's why Nike continue to pay him millions, and it was only 6 months ago there was talk of adidas trying to get him to switch.